Re: [apps-discuss] Payment Protocols -- was Re: Proposal for a Finance Area Mailing List

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 00:35 10-04-2012, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>The title "finance area mailing list" is probably the wrong term. 
>Instead, we are talking

Yes.

This is not the ideal venue for discussing about the creation of a 
new (IETF) area in my opinion.

>I don't know how far these attempts are away from what Walter is 
>trying to accomplish. I believe the main disconnect is in the 
>understanding of how the process works in bringing work to the IETF 
>and the lack of agreed terminology and scope makes is easy to talk 
>past each other.

Agreed.

Although I do point people to the "Tao" and other process-related 
documents (see http://www.ietf.org/newcomers.html for a starter 
guide), it is not helpful to people trying to understand how the 
process works and to bring new work in the IETF.  Please note that 
this should not be construed as an opinion about whether person X is 
a newcomer or not.

>Once getting to the point of talking about the same topic there are 
>various other challenges, such as
>* who are all the stakeholders that need to be involved?
>* are these communities interested to bring their work to the IETF?

The problem has turned into a catch 22.  There is a view that having 
an IETF mailing list would allow communities interested in bringing 
their work to the IETF to discuss and build support.  There is 
another view that by having such a mailing list, the IETF is 
"blessing" the work.

A mailing list allows focused discussions by a group of people 
interested in working on, for example, protocol X.  The absence of a 
mailing list does not hinder that.  One could look at this in terms 
of discussions.  If the volume of discussions is significant enough, 
it makes sense to move the discussion to a new mailing list if there 
isn't already one.

>* why did various earlier attempts fail?

Previous attempts have been about EDINT.  That is not the same as the 
problem discussed recently.

Regards,
-sm